[topicmapmail] Announcement of XML Schema for ISO 13250 Topic Maps

[David RR Webber]

Message text written by "Martin Bryan"
>I'm not requiring anyone to do anything, and most definitely not saying
anything about AF processors. I am trying to show people who have looked
seriously at XML Schemas, and particularly at their newest feature,.
abstract elements, why these will be so important for building the next
generations of interworkable applications. I'm using Topic Maps as an ideal
application for the demonstration of this feature, alongside their
application in ebXML.

>>>>>>>>>. Martin - I of course have huge reservations on Schema as the
                       W3C have currently cast it.  That not withstanding -
I am trying
                       to work hard to salvage and make workable as much of
the
                       core function set as possible.  Therefore I broadly
agree with
                       you here - let's see what is workable and what adds
value.
                       The jury is still out on if we can get robust Schema
parser
                        implementations that are interoperable - if we get
that I'll
                        be impressed for sure!
<<

>>>>>>>>>  I strongly agree that the best way forward is driven by real
                       business applications and the synergy between our
ebXML
                       work, schema and topicmaps as a generalized function
set.
<<

What I am also trying to point out to people is that XTM is only a stop
gap,
and a relatively inefficient one at that. You should be aware that its not
just XTM I am complaining about, but RDF, which is also not efficient
enough
for the long-term management of semantics.

>>>>>>>>>> RDF is mostly poorly understood - and certainly cast in many 
                        roles for which it was never intended.  I'd like to
see Bob 
                        Schloss putting out some of the great PPT's I know
he has
                        to help people refine the understanding - and
particularly to
                        understand what you should NOT be trying to do with
RDF.
                        Bottom line - RDF has a very narrow focus and
applicability.
                        On the XTM front - is there a definitive PDF
available as
                        implementation spec's?  
<<

One last statement for you all to argue about (not aimed at you  Murray!).
If it is the feeling of the members of this list that the only XML-based
approach to topic maps can be XTM then I suggest you immediately change the
inaccurate name of this mailing list and make it clear it is the XTMmail
list and not a general purpose list for promoting the use of topic maps.

Martin Bryan
<
>>>>>>>>>>>> Certainly one should always be cautious about a V1.0 
                             of anything - there's those ugly design
compromises - 
                             and like with W3C Schema - if the original
requirements
                             spec's do not match with your true business
needs
                             there's going to be big issues.
                             
                             Like I said before - time and enhanced
perspectives
                             really help here.  Trouble is - as with Schema
- vendors
                             want to promote 'the solution' and foist
product on 
                             people somewhat sooner than is perhaps
prudent.
                             Them darn marketing folks just don't
understand!!!

Thanks, DW.